New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-08-09
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
,oro,oov .xD COPYRIGHT.
SOCIOLJG1 AND OO1 f'1011'' - -.
.OCIOIOGY By IonS BAscoM lZno' pp' A'' |o-
7V~'o'N0 IA r. Putnain's Sons.


..oo ,hat he has not attempted full and syste-
vratic discussion of his subject, and that he has
often refrained from Offering formal lnductiVe
,roof Of the propositions which lie lays down ior
opy acceptance The mind Is so easily msicd
Nv spccions argument and so readily believes
ANYTHING to be proof which makes bold pretence
of being proof, that 1t seems best to rely on
"tbe coherent connection Of ideas aid the suita-
bleness of these ideas to the facts which they
cover" Simple assertion then carries WIN ~
the most complete authority. The righteousness
Of this substitute for augmentation Is op'lou''
IL you select your ideas, and select inc '"0''
that fit them, you can prove nothlhg' i0u w
not exclude the possibility OF diherchO WI"
clusion from yours as the result Oh 'oNp
md systematic discussion of oil the lacts'
Professor Bascom not only falls into the error
of fitting his selected facts to his sciec'eo lucas
but he makes statements as III OF TACT "hich "
saw the least, cannot pass unquestiohco'
we take his sociology at all We must l"hc So
dcaI Of IL ON his own exclusive authority. we
have the less hesitation In poihline ouO o''
drawback since he seems to be well aware oil H.
and IN bolJ that the convcnicnccs OF his system
upon the whole make amends for its lndubitaDie
defects
Cur nrescnt purpose is not to review his book,
Int 10 make a brief survey of what he says on
the subject of copyright, which may serve per-
hans as a typical illustration. lie looks with
jealousy upon the tendency of authors and In
yentors TO claim as their own the products Oh
their intellectual labor. In reality he thihKs'
The State is the principal factor in giving thclr
tntauribIe devices q substantial value, and the
safe is bound therefore to sec that they 90 nou
make an excessive profit out of them. lhere
is no inherent right of ownership In forms oi
EXPRESSION That docs not exist untll III ID
Given bv law. Even when author has created
something OF intrinsic worth he has no power
nor so much as the germs of 1t, TO convert una'
product of the mind into exchange values Inns
is the function of the state which represents the
contribution of society to the general RESULT
and is bound to consult the interests OF society
in the operation. The spiritual product OF au-
thorshp being transformed into salabie goods
Iv the operation Of the State, the state must tItc
care to exact good price for its agency IL IL
would not "sQuander the public inheritance
IT, REQUIRES very little reflection 10 perceive that
this theory Of the relative shares OF the author
md society in the production of the merchant
able entity known as a poem or mover Is
fiction. The book has an exchange value" as
soon as il is printed. 1t is printed at the pains
and cost of the author, and of his partner the
publisher. without any help from the State
which. instead of being the principal agent IN
the transformation, does not intervene IN the
affair at all. All that the state does by copy
right laws is to provide that the exchange
value shall not be appropriated by those VINO
have no right to it. ALI property OF whatever
kind depends for it's security upon laws against
theft and literary property In this respect sIahus
upon the same footing as any other product Oh
labor. 1t is absurd to say that because rights
are not safe unless society agrees to punish Vlo-
lators of Them therefore society is the prlnclpai
agency in creating them. Human life is not secure
or as Professor Bascom might say, has no eX-
vluugc vuiur-without the protection of the state;
have we therefore, right to our lives until stat
ute has been enacted against murderp
1t is in reply TO Mr.. Lowel's famous remark
that an honest book is better than cheap book
that Professor Bascom declares that the right of
ownership in forms of expression does not exist TIL
1t IS given by law, and till this ownership accrues
it cannot be stolen" Mr.. Lowell's position that
an author has, aptccedent to statutory privilege,
any natural right to the product of his Intellectual
labor he declares to be such bold begging OF
the question to cast suspicion upon the entire
method of thought which accompanies It," Pro-
fessor Bascom himself, however, is guilty not only
of begging the question but of something worse.
The natural right Of ownership in literary proper
ty irrespective Of legislation, was recognized and
enforced by the common law for at least two hun
dred years before any statute of copyright was en-
acted 1t has been maintained, with arguments
which have never been satisfactorily answered. by
nearly all the great masters of English jurspru-
dence who have treated the subject and although
for reasons of public policy the duration of copy
right is now limited by statute. the principle of
the law still upon the inherent right of every
man to the fruits of his labor. There is no escape
from this conclusion except by the preposterous
notion of Professor Bascom that the chief effective
agency in bringing forth poem is not the poet
but the legislature. Those therefore who assume
the natural right of ownership in literary produc
lions, far from begging the question, are only
stating a principle which has been practically
recognized ever since authorship became calling,
and has been defended with telling and exhaustive
arguments in the discussions Of more than CEN
tury. 1t is to the dogmatic denial of a familiar
and reasonable doctrine that we must apply the
reproacb Of such "a bold begging Of the question
as to cast SUSPECT N on the entire method OF
thought which accompanies it,"
Professor Bascon's remarks are directed espe-
cially to the subject of international copyright,
but his propositions are equally pertinent to the
case of domestic authors, since they all rest upon
the assumption that there is no inherent right Of
property in the products of intellectual abor and
that In granting the author limited privilege of
enjoying what he has created, the community must
dole out it's favor with a grudging hand looking
first to its own advantage, and stopping its benev-
olence when it thinks that the author has had
enough. What is enough might seem to be diff
Gcult question. Professor Bascom however, has
his ideas on that subject. He says that when the
demand for work is sufficient to call for o re-
print. the author is already assured Of fair pro-
fit and has no right to ask for any more. Let us
see. reprint Of an ordinary book will pay when
the sale has reached about s. 600 copies, on which
the authors royalty is $500. and as few writer's
can expect to produce more than one successful
book in year, it appears that fai remunera-